Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 59

Thread: We went to the London CofS to buy books - what happened & a few questions

  1. #21
    Squirrel Extraordinaire Dulloldfart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    North-East England
    Posts
    23,892

    Default Re: We went to the London CofS to buy books - what happened & a few questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Swundel View Post
    Oh boy, I would have a few questions about why exactly they think you can measure engrams from past lives based on the conductivity of your skin.
    What happens is you will be addressing something, you know it hasn't resolved, the auditor maybe asks, "Is there an earlier similar incident?" Something might flash into your mind which coincides with a reaction on the meter, and it goes on from there. If you're doing it "properly", you tell the auditor what you see, maybe, "Well this is weird, I get a picture of being in a riot in this French-looking city, but I definitely know I've never been there . . .". The auditor senses you are still looking at this fascinating scene, and says, "mm-mm" or something. And then you maybe dive in and take up the incident, or bounce out of it because it's just too weird, or whatever, and the thing sort of resolves one way or another.

    Was it a real past life? Hard to say! The auditor is definitely not allowed to say it is, or it isn't. You're supposed to sort it out for yourself.

    In some situations, one big problem with the meter is the suggestibility factor: you think maybe it is some past life you're looking at, the needle waggles for whatever reason, and then you both go off haring down the track in search of this "past life incident" that may be completely imaginary, but since the meter said it is you obligingly invent the details. This is not in the least therapeutic.

    Paul
    PaulsRobot Iconic now available for use at www.PaulsRobot2.com. With Auto-Report. Video here. Introductory post here. Debug post here. Dipoles post here.

  2. Thanks Cat's Squirrel, Swundel says "thank you" for this post
    Likes HelluvaHoax!, Bluebell liked this post
  3. #22

    Default Re: We went to the London CofS to buy books - what happened & a few questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Dulloldfart View Post
    What happens is you will be addressing something, you know it hasn't resolved, the auditor maybe asks, "Is there an earlier similar incident?" Something might flash into your mind which coincides with a reaction on the meter, and it goes on from there. If you're doing it "properly", you tell the auditor what you see, maybe, "Well this is weird, I get a picture of being in a riot in this French-looking city, but I definitely know I've never been there . . .". The auditor senses you are still looking at this fascinating scene, and says, "mm-mm" or something. And then you maybe dive in and take up the incident, or bounce out of it because it's just too weird, or whatever, and the thing sort of resolves one way or another.

    Was it a real past life? Hard to say! The auditor is definitely not allowed to say it is, or it isn't. You're supposed to sort it out for yourself.

    One big problem with the meter is the suggestibility factor: you think maybe it is some past life you're looking at, the needle waggles for whatever reason, and then you both go off haring down the track in search of this "past life incident" that may be completely imaginary, but since the meter said it is you obligingly invent the details. This is not in the least therapeutic.

    Paul
    Yeah, I have seen some reenactments of this as well as filmed processing done by indies. So, within the context of Dianetics, it does make some sense. The point is just the absurdity of the final conclusion "your past lives most measurably manifest in the conductivity of your skin". Stated in that form, it seems just too crazy to make up - as do so many other aspects of Scientology.

    The point about obligingly inventing new details is interesting - I think it probably applies to real incidents, too. In fact, it could well be the leading reason people who attest clear might believe they have perfect memory: in those auditing sessions, you unknowingly invented an immense number of small details about incidents going back decades that you, in reality, remember very little about.
    Last edited by Swundel; 22nd May 2017 at 08:07 PM.

  4. Thanks Dulloldfart says "thank you" for this post
  5. #23
    Patron with Honors pineapple's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    only by consideration or postulate
    Posts
    323

    Default Re: We went to the London CofS to buy books - what happened & a few questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Swundel View Post
    ... snip ...

    Of course, these people don't have magic powers that can turn anybody into a Sea Org member in an afternoon. Yet, something in me doesn't want me to take the risk. If I was ever religious, Scientology is exactly the kind of religion I would enjoy. Many of its silly gimmicks push just the right buttons for my ego. And it's not like there aren't those around who first heard of Scientology from the critics and then went ahead and joined it.
    My mind has a fantastic capacity to rationalise the irrational - that's why I can procrastinate with frightening consistency. I would probably only need to be convinced of one thing - that Dianetics really works - and I'd be in enthusiastically for half a year and then with far less enthusiasm for possibly a decade or two, depending really on how hard the process of leaving is made. I'd probably finally end up signing an NDA and shutting up about my experiences for the rest of my life.

    I don't really have that "rebellious teen" character to me, and I never did. If I ever got to the point where I accepted the C of S as the authority in my life, I'd stay loyal to it for a very substantial amount of time.
    And frankly, I see much better things in my future than a career in the Sea Organisation.

    That's why last year I simply walked past the building a few times, not daring to stop in front of it. I slowly built up the resolve to go in for 15 minutes without fearing instant indoctrination. It might take another while before I am confident enough about my position to stay inside for a couple of hours and really have a chat with the people.

    I might pay another visit in a year or two, perhaps to buy a couple more books, perhaps not. In any case, I am slowly starting to want to go there and ask pointed questions in the friendliest possible way. See how they can handle that situation where a suspiciously well-informed wog comes in and questions the tech in ways a Scientologist never would, yet using the correct terminology. Oh boy, I would have a few questions about why exactly they think you can measure engrams from past lives based on the conductivity of your skin. At what point would I be flagged 1.1 and thrown out? :P
    I laughed when I read this post, because you sound so much like me before I got in.

    I wasn't easy to convince, either. I took the free personality test, but wouldn't buy the copy of DMSMH. But I did come back for an intro lecture. Then I bought DMSMH. I read it, then went to the library and got "Scientology, the Now Religion" by George Malko and "The Scandal of Scientology" by Paulette Cooper. I went back and discussed these books with the very pleasant people at scientology. They did not say, "It's all lies" or "These people are SP's." They calmly listened to me and gave what I thought were reasonable answers to my questions. Based on my experience, scientology didn't seem at all like what was described in Paulette Cooper's book (which I began to suspect was wildly exaggerated if not downright untrue). I heard another lecture or two, then took the plunge and signed up for the Communications Course ($50).

    The Comm Course TOTALLY convinced me that scientology worked. When I finished the course they gave me a certificate that said "Hubbard Apprentice Scientologist" and yes, at that point I WAS a scientologist and damn proud of it.

    See, it isn't ALL complete bullshit. There are some parts of it that actually CAN produce beneficial effects. I felt at the time that the Comm Course had changed my life for the better. I was completely blown away by it. After that I started doing the courses as soon as I could afford them. (I didn't have much money.) After I'd been at it for about 6 months I was a Dianetic Auditor (the grade chart was a little different then, 1970's). At that point I joined staff, and hung around for another 6 years.

    Just because you're an intelligent person doesn't mean you can't get hooked. It can happen easier than you think. Be careful. Ultimately, it really is not worth it. Even if you're fortunate enough to avoid the worst of scn (as I was), you will still end up spending a lot of time and money that would have been better spent elsewhere, and putting yourself through a lot of emotional turmoil.

    "Clear" as described in DMSMH does not exist, and never did. "OT's" are deluded: they have no OT powers. They are hypnotizing themselves. Ultimately scientology is a con and it always was. It is based on lies. The few positive things are greatly, greatly overbalanced by the bad.

    Be very, very careful. You don't want to be sitting there in 10 years thinking "Gee, I wish I'd listened to that guy."
    I had a dream I was awake and awoke to find I was asleep. -- Stan Laurel

  6. Thanks Freeminds says "thank you" for this post
  7. #24
    Gold Meritorious Sponsor HelluvaHoax!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    22,076

    Default Re: We went to the London CofS to buy books - what happened & a few questions

    .

    RANDOM COMMENTS:

    * Cool read, that was interesting!

    * Guessing that the reason your ENGLISH and writing facility is well above the average for English speaking persons--and echelons above a high-schooler in a foreign country is this: You created a fictional identify for ESMB exactly the same way you created one for your visit to the Church of Scientology. LOL

    * The mystery of the book seal: Just a guess, but perhaps a prospective customer wandered into the bookstore one day and was leafing through the various Hubbard books (the books were never sealed in the cult's early decades)--and they stopped on a passage from HISTORY OF MAN and asked the bookstore clerk: "Hey, do you people actually believe this Gorilla Goal Implant crazy shit? LOL" After that, senior management created the seal tech, ensuring that nobody: a) got freaked out about the crazy shit inside the books before they paid for it; b) got some of Ron's tech for free (before paying) which (according to Ron) would turn that reader into a "criminal" (out-exchange).

    * Why he had to go to another floor to get a tiny bit of change: Because before being entrusted to carry the change back (by himself, unescorted by security) he would have had to do a clay demo of the Hubbard lecture where Ron describes all the horrific tragedies and sudden deaths that befell persons who tried to sabotage the church by embezzling money or in any way inhibiting money "flows" that the org was able to send uplines to Ron. (no joke, lol)
    Last edited by HelluvaHoax!; 23rd May 2017 at 06:17 PM.
    ________________________

    Scientology literally saved my life! Without Ron's books I would have frozen to death!!! (see avatar)

    Scientology in one word? HelluvaHoax!

    I never felt as free as when I freed myself from "Total Freedom".

    For offended Scientologists reading this blasphemy about L. Ron Hubbard---my apologies for talking about real life without lying to you, like Scientology, with goo-goo theta-talk. I know you don't have a floating needle right now. You're not supposed to.

  8. Thanks Freeminds says "thank you" for this post
    LOL! Boson Wog Stark, TheOriginalBigBlue, Swundel laughed at this post
  9. #25
    Gold Meritorious Patron TheOriginalBigBlue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    2,057

    Default Re: We went to the London CofS to buy books - what happened & a few questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Swundel View Post
    To tell you the truth, I suppose we are a little loaded. The 38.50 - shared between us two, making it < 20 each - was perfectly within our budget for a joke.
    And frankly, that's how the whole idea started. As a joke. It just so happened that we had an opening and followed through with it.

    I know a lot of people on these forums have a serious grudge against Scientology. And why wouldn't they? When an organisation tears apart your family and steals decades of your life, it is completely reasonable to wish to end it.

    But that's not the viewpoint we hold. From our point of view, Scientology is a bizarre organisation consisting of less than 50 000 foreigners. Seeing it end doesn't concern us hugely. In fact, there is an individual benefit of making that staff member's life just a little easier by allowing him to "stand up in the next staff meeting" and tell his success story. And from our perspective, that small benefit for the only Scientologist I have ever spoken to (save for the reg who assigned him to us) is far less remote and more meaningful than the abstract benefit of not letting this organisation have 'almost 40 pounds'. I'm not a huge believer in consumer activism, honestly. I prefer these issues to be dealt with on a governmental level and in the courts rather than me denying myself a deal I'd rather take up. I can see why others would see this differently, but that's just my selfish little point of view from someone who, I am sure, "has still much to learn about the realities of life".

    I've now fully read the Fundamentals of Thought and The Problems of Work. The big fonts and long dictionaries make these books look deceptively big from the outside - especially the hardcover variants. Once you take off the dust covers, they look much more legit from the outside than - considering their contents - they have any right to. It often feels like I am just reading some man's shower thoughts from a fancy book with a faux leather cover.

    The Problems of Work wasn't completely useless. I can sort of relate to some of the concepts, though much of it is stuff I already knew/believed just stated using Scientology terms. Nevertheless, having these things restated to you in a different way can be helpful reminders and can give you some additional depth in understanding when it comes to those concepts. Overall, it was a fairly enjoyable read - certainly better than the Fundamentals of Thought.

    I'm now starting with DMSMH which is probably going to be even more useless than the Fundamentals of Thought in terms of real life applicability. Nevertheless, it's one of those books I just want to read 'for the sake of it' - like that 80-page committee report on the reorganisation supervision of the production unregulated traffic safety equipment and its potential future regulation dating back to the 80's. Absolutely irrelevant to my life, but I like the language and have a very low threshold for interest.

    So far I haven't had to look up a single word that wasn't the editor's glossary at the back. That said, I haven't gone on an MU hunt every time I disagreed with some idiocy like calling their definition of a Game (two or more conflicting purposes) a 'scientifically proven fact'.


    I did not visit the Church again during my trip. Primarily because I do not have a particular interest in being on any of their databases. Being a repeat visitor would make it harder to smoothly avoid those details being added to their bank.

    Of course, these people don't have magic powers that can turn anybody into a Sea Org member in an afternoon. Yet, something in me doesn't want me to take the risk. If I was ever religious, Scientology is exactly the kind of religion I would enjoy. Many of its silly gimmicks push just the right buttons for my ego. And it's not like there aren't those around who first heard of Scientology from the critics and then went ahead and joined it.
    My mind has a fantastic capacity to rationalise the irrational - that's why I can procrastinate with frightening consistency. I would probably only need to be convinced of one thing - that Dianetics really works - and I'd be in enthusiastically for half a year and then with far less enthusiasm for possibly a decade or two, depending really on how hard the process of leaving is made. I'd probably finally end up signing an NDA and shutting up about my experiences for the rest of my life.

    I don't really have that "rebellious teen" character to me, and I never did. If I ever got to the point where I accepted the C of S as the authority in my life, I'd stay loyal to it for a very substantial amount of time.
    And frankly, I see much better things in my future than a career in the Sea Organisation.

    That's why last year I simply walked past the building a few times, not daring to stop in front of it. I slowly built up the resolve to go in for 15 minutes without fearing instant indoctrination. It might take another while before I am confident enough about my position to stay inside for a couple of hours and really have a chat with the people.

    I might pay another visit in a year or two, perhaps to buy a couple more books, perhaps not. In any case, I am slowly starting to want to go there and ask pointed questions in the friendliest possible way. See how they can handle that situation where a suspiciously well-informed wog comes in and questions the tech in ways a Scientologist never would, yet using the correct terminology. Oh boy, I would have a few questions about why exactly they think you can measure engrams from past lives based on the conductivity of your skin. At what point would I be flagged 1.1 and thrown out? :P
    Several thoughts - now that you have a fake address in their database it would be likely that they would look you up on a return visit and ask for a correction so, yes, that would be tricky.

    Your perspective up to this point seems very objective. A major turning point for many people is going full blown Ganzfeld while doing TR O on the Communication Course. This tends to affirm that you have gone "Exterior" and therefore Scientology does have a working technology of the spirit. It is very difficult to explain the route into personal dedication to Scientology without a significant subjective experience.

    It is a cardinal rule that questions not be answered with Verbal Data, often internally referred to as VD. You would be given a carefully practiced vague response followed by being directed to Source - an LRH written or recorded reference. Get too risque with questions such as what really happened to Lisa McPherson and why she had over 100 insect feeding sites on her body and you will be shown the door.

    The SO contract is not enforceable in any court. You don't have to show. They will frantically hound you to route on asap as they know there is a very short window before second thoughts and family and friends advise against it. The bank has it's own will to survive and it knows that joining the SO is counter survival so you can't be left to trust your own decision making processes. Imagine being sued for not working a billion years without pay being adjusted for inflation. The Freeloader debt is not enforceable either. The only obligation is one's own submission and desire to maintain "Good Standing".

    I don't know if they require NDAs and other waivers before signing an SO contract or agreement by any other name but it would most certainly be a part of the signing or upon routing onto the EPF.

    You use the word "grudge" but another way of looking at this is, after being tricked and manipulated into contributing to harming other people there is a desire to balance the scales. LRH didn't invent amends, he just twisted something perfectly normal and human to his own purposes.

  10. #26

    Default Re: We went to the London CofS to buy books - what happened & a few questions

    Quote Originally Posted by pineapple View Post
    I laughed when I read this post, because you sound so much like me before I got in.

    I wasn't easy to convince, either. I took the free personality test, but wouldn't buy the copy of DMSMH. But I did come back for an intro lecture. Then I bought DMSMH. I read it, then went to the library and got "Scientology, the Now Religion" by George Malko and "The Scandal of Scientology" by Paulette Cooper. I went back and discussed these books with the very pleasant people at scientology. They did not say, "It's all lies" or "These people are SP's." They calmly listened to me and gave what I thought were reasonable answers to my questions. Based on my experience, scientology didn't seem at all like what was described in Paulette Cooper's book (which I began to suspect was wildly exaggerated if not downright untrue). I heard another lecture or two, then took the plunge and signed up for the Communications Course ($50).

    The Comm Course TOTALLY convinced me that scientology worked. When I finished the course they gave me a certificate that said "Hubbard Apprentice Scientologist" and yes, at that point I WAS a scientologist and damn proud of it.

    See, it isn't ALL complete bullshit. There are some parts of it that actually CAN produce beneficial effects. I felt at the time that the Comm Course had changed my life for the better. I was completely blown away by it. After that I started doing the courses as soon as I could afford them. (I didn't have much money.) After I'd been at it for about 6 months I was a Dianetic Auditor (the grade chart was a little different then, 1970's). At that point I joined staff, and hung around for another 6 years.

    Just because you're an intelligent person doesn't mean you can't get hooked. It can happen easier than you think. Be careful. Ultimately, it really is not worth it. Even if you're fortunate enough to avoid the worst of scn (as I was), you will still end up spending a lot of time and money that would have been better spent elsewhere, and putting yourself through a lot of emotional turmoil.

    "Clear" as described in DMSMH does not exist, and never did. "OT's" are deluded: they have no OT powers. They are hypnotizing themselves. Ultimately scientology is a con and it always was. It is based on lies. The few positive things are greatly, greatly overbalanced by the bad.

    Be very, very careful. You don't want to be sitting there in 10 years thinking "Gee, I wish I'd listened to that guy."
    Scientology.org has a FAQ page now, where they even go into things like the RPF. Reading those, I can totally see what you mean by "answers that seem reasonable".
    "then took the plunge" this is what I have been most avoiding with my engagement with the group. See how I did 2 months of research into the way the staff interact with the public before going in and buying a book? I wanted to be surprised in as few ways as possible. For me taking the comm course would mean reading all the guide materials given for it, listening to a dozen or two ex's experiences with it, and finding the "non-Scn" explanation for all the strange phenomena which take place (ie. exteriorisation).

    And yeah, I have heard that everything up to Clear is actually alright and somewhat beneficial. And I have little doubt to believe it. If C of S wasn't what it is and the bridge didn't have such an Orwellian name and it ended at Grade IV, I'd probably take them up on the offer and then move on with my life.

    My downright biggest problem with the C of S is the PC folder. I am a person that values my privacy and is frightened by the thought of transcripts of me being sincere (if such a thing exists :P) being in the vaults of some religious organisation. Companies are bad enough, and they only believe that they are making money. C of S meanwhile believes it is literally saving the world, and when you have that kind of a "potential benefit", you can tolerate some serious damage or moral 'leaps' for the greater good.

    And yeah, Clear on upwards is complete fantasy and probably hurts a person more than it helps. The cognitive dissonance between being struggling with your finances and believing you have OT super powers can't have anything but a bad and numbing effect on you. In my country, there was a scandal with Scientologists committing suicide to 'drop their body' and get away from their debts. This was common enough for the BANKS to speak out, of all people. I understand this isn't very common in most countries where Scientology operates, and it largely killed it off here. (There are expected to be only a few dozen in the entire country, down from the couple hundred at peak)

    I wonder how a Scientologist would respond to the question "why can't DM create new tech or expand upon the existing tech?". Stuck between insulting the COB and diminishing LRH, how would they navigate this particular question? What about it then being followed up with "DMSMH says Dianetics is a 'family of sciences'. Why could a science only be advanced by one man? Isn't the whole point of science the fact that it is reproducible by anyone anywhere and that it can be expanded and refuted with experiments?"

  11. Thanks Enthetan, pineapple says "thank you" for this post
  12. #27
    Patron with Honors pineapple's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    only by consideration or postulate
    Posts
    323

    Default Re: We went to the London CofS to buy books - what happened & a few questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Swundel View Post
    ... snip ...
    And yeah, I have heard that everything up to Clear is actually alright and somewhat beneficial. And I have little doubt to believe it. If C of S wasn't what it is and the bridge didn't have such an Orwellian name and it ended at Grade IV, I'd probably take them up on the offer and then move on with my life.
    If even that were true, there would be people lined up around the block outside orgs with suitcases full of money to pay for services. No. The Purification RD is nonsense and possibly even harmful. Drugs do not stay in the body the way LRH claims they do. The Survival RD is ~200 hours of Objective Processes, touching walls, etc. A little of this can be beneficial, but 200 hours? In Dianetics the auditor tacitly accepts whatever incidents the preclear comes up with as true ("never correct or invalidate the preclear's data"), which encourages the acceptance of fantasy as reality. This is a setup for the really gonzo OT levels later on.

    Dianetics sometimes produces a positive result -- so I hear. I audited a lot of Dianetics, but never saw any of the miraculous results claimed. Oh, the pc's were happy, the chains "erased," everything went as it was supposed to -- but I never saw anyone relieved of even a minor physical problem. I heard lots of stories about people who achieved this, but I never actually saw it myself. I'm willing to believe it happens occasionally, but nowhere near as often as they'd like you to believe. Cures happen at Lourdes, too, but that doesn't mean that Roman Catholic theology is valid.

    Almost all the dianetics I audited was on the Drug Rundown, which is dedicated to running out the harmful effects of drugs -- something scientology is obsessed with. (This obsession began in the late '60's when there were a lot of alarming stories in the press about the growing use of psychedelic drugs, and I think LRH thought taking an anti-drug stance was good PR for CoS. The anti-drug stance doesn't exist prior to that time.) The Drug Rundown typically lasted hundreds of hours in the 1970's (and today I hear they're still addressing the problem on the OT levels). The "wins" you get on the drug rundown are along the lines of "I feel much more in present time" or "I no longer feel any desire to smoke pot" rather than "My leg doesn't hurt any more."

    Dianetics came before Grades 0-IV on the Grade Chart when I was in. They've since flipped it around, so dianetics comes after grades. Because dianetics came earlier then, there were always a lot more people around needing dianetics than scientology. The ranks tended to thin out as you got higher up "The Bridge." So I got more experience auditing dianetics than grades. Based on my limited experience I'd say the grades are relatively benign.

    Quote Originally Posted by Swundel View Post
    I wonder how a Scientologist would respond to the question "why can't DM create new tech or expand upon the existing tech?". Stuck between insulting the COB and diminishing LRH, how would they navigate this particular question? What about it then being followed up with "DMSMH says Dianetics is a 'family of sciences'. Why could a science only be advanced by one man? Isn't the whole point of science the fact that it is reproducible by anyone anywhere and that it can be expanded and refuted with experiments?"
    Early on, LRH was occasionally willing to give someone else credit for an original idea. But as time went on, he insisted more and more that he alone was the sole source of the tech. He had become very adamant about this by 1965 or so. Anyone else's contribution was minimized and finally erased. Scientologists have been so heavily indoctrinated with the idea that LRH is "Source" that they recoil at the idea that anyone else could (or ever did) make a valid contribution to the tech of scientology.
    I had a dream I was awake and awoke to find I was asleep. -- Stan Laurel

  13. Thanks Little David says "thank you" for this post
  14. #28
    Gold Meritorious Patron
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    3,731

    Default Re: We went to the London CofS to buy books - what happened & a few questions

    Quote Originally Posted by TheOriginalBigBlue View Post
    Dianetics started out in 1950 with the idea that the mind consisted of various compartments, however, you are left wondering what is the physical world structure of the mind. Is it bio chemical or an energy cloud created by the body, etc?

    By 1952 LRH had a fully formed concept of non-corporeal beings called Targs which were invading the physical universe and now people were clearly a 3 part composite of Mind, Body, Spirit/Thetan - Scientology.

    Also in 1952 "A History of Man" introduces the concept of the "Genetic Entity" which contains it's own form of rudimentary mind or memory.

    By 1967, in could be assumed, the Targ concept had evolved into the Body Thetan mythology - because Targs are no longer being mentioned but BTs, which fit the same concept of other non-corporeal races of beings is.

    So in reading things like the Fundamentals of Thought, you are shifting between concepts of a physical person, an energy based mind and a non-corporeal being that uses both energy or pure postulate/intention to operate. If you try to adhere to a physical concept of the nature of people this will not make sense. If you believe in people as a spiritual composite then you will be able to shoehorn these concepts into some kind of understanding or personal application. This is where things become problematic. The concepts still don't work very well and they seem to shift randomly between states of being so you keep reading, hoping that the next book or course will pull it all together.

    By that time you are on lines in a formal setting, taking courses and doing auditing, where the self reinforcing disciplines of Word Clearing and only being permitted to refer to the closed loop written or taped material from LRH as "Source" are applied. Slowly all the other control mechanisms come into play until everything is being done in conformity with "The greatest good for the greatest number of dynamics" where Scientology, being the stable datum of understanding all knowledge is the senior deciding factor over what is the greatest good in your day-to-day priorities.

    People who are starting to read this stuff in the comfort of their own homes, without the organization directing interpretation, are missing the element of control that is intended to accompany this material. This is how innocent, well intentioned people, albeit lacking analysis disciplines, start down the path to becoming obsessive controlling tyrants.

    You are missing half of the component here - the LRH policies and personal orders directing how a person studying this material is to be controlled. These policies are not written as straight management directives. They are also interwoven with LRH's world view on spirituality, which includes his theology based on whole track recall of millions and trillions of years of intergalactic history. Even the Org Board is based on such recall - with LRH's own unique modification of a Qualifications Division to correct the org's own product, something no previous intergalactic civilization ever thought of.

    Most public Scientologists have very little understanding of Admin Tech. And even if they made a serious effort to study it, they would still have the same problem. For every policy there is an equal opposing policy. The decision over which policy is senior in any given moment depends on pure force of authority and that was always ultimately LRH, or now his successor. And the criteria for making these policy interpretations existed in confidential telexes, euphemistically "advices", orders, data evals and projects. Until the internet, Public Scientologists never saw these and for the most part even Sea Org members who were not directly on LRH's lines or involved with the implementations never saw these. After the 1977 FBI raid there was a concerted effort to vet and shred LRH orders and internal Sea Org directives to cover up his direct control of the organization and funds so after all this time the hidden LRH totalitarian state has been sanitized. Public may associate much of the present day faults with current management but if you were a public Scientologist without much staff or Sea Org experience when LRH died in 1986, then you may still be stuck in a sort of limbo area where LRH and the Tech remain deserving of respect.

    So to paraphrase LRH, by studying these books in some safe enclave is like a snail trying to understand the Parthenon by crawling over it's reliefs.
    Good post.

    Since you mention "concepts of a physical person, an energy based mind and a non-corporeal being," one of my problems when I was "in" was my insistence that I had dreams in which I had actually left the body - not me as a thetan, but my astral body, since I like many people had the "falling off a cliff" sensation when waking up from a dream (which occultists ascribe to the return of the astral body to the physical).

    Of course there is no astral body in Scientology, so I got into trouble for misleading a fellow student (I was on the Comm course at the time) by talking about this in the Org.

    Knowing what I know now, I think I should have asked why in that instance I should consider LRH's word on the subject to be more valid than my own. It might have got me thrown off course, but I think by then I'd gotten everything I was going to get from the course anyway.
    "Life constantly changes. Some of the changes we like, some we hate, but it keeps changing."

    - Bo Lozoff

    "Dream more, learn more, care more and be more.

    - Dolly Parton

  15. Likes phenomanon, TheOriginalBigBlue liked this post
  16. #29

    Default Re: We went to the London CofS to buy books - what happened & a few questions

    Quote Originally Posted by pineapple View Post
    he Purification RD is nonsense and possibly even harmful. Drugs do not stay in the body the way LRH claims they do.

    Dianetics sometimes produces a positive result -- so I hear. I audited a lot of Dianetics, but never saw any of the miraculous results claimed. Oh, the pc's were happy, the chains "erased," everything went as it was supposed to -- but I never saw anyone relieved of even a minor physical problem.

    Early on, LRH was occasionally willing to give someone else credit for an original idea. But as time went on, he insisted more and more that he alone was the sole source of the tech. He had become very adamant about this by 1965 or so. Anyone else's contribution was minimized and finally erased. Scientologists have been so heavily indoctrinated with the idea that LRH is "Source" that they recoil at the idea that anyone else could (or ever did) make a valid contribution to the tech of scientology.
    Oh yeah, I absolutely was not talking about purif. As somebody who loves the Sauna, it seems like just taking that fantastic and relaxing concept and somehow managing to ruin it and make it dangerous.
    The idea of auditing curing physical illness through anything but placebo is also something I flatly reject.

    What I was quite specifically referring to was the process of discharging the emotion from past experiences. That's not unique to Scientology, but it seems to me that Scn is particularly systematic about that. Simply getting comfortable restating your past actions seems valuable enough to me. Beyond that, the pseudoscience is at best entertaining or slightly helpful and at worst highly damaging.

    I'd be interested in learning how many contributions were in fact accepted, with what degree of publicity, and how they were eventually supressed. That kind of history of Scientology and Dianetics I would actually find quite interesting.

  17. Thanks pineapple, TheOriginalBigBlue says "thank you" for this post
  18. #30
    Gold Meritorious Patron TheOriginalBigBlue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    2,057

    Default Re: We went to the London CofS to buy books - what happened & a few questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Swundel View Post
    ///
    I wonder how a Scientologist would respond to the question "why can't DM create new tech or expand upon the existing tech?". Stuck between insulting the COB and diminishing LRH, how would they navigate this particular question? What about it then being followed up with "DMSMH says Dianetics is a 'family of sciences'. Why could a science only be advanced by one man? Isn't the whole point of science the fact that it is reproducible by anyone anywhere and that it can be expanded and refuted with experiments?"
    With KSW, LRH made it very difficult for anyone to alter or build on the "Technology", or policy as they are hopelessly interconnected.

    This clearly presented a major problem for any successor. A peaceful well intentioned successor would be stuck enforcing the self destructive and dated aspects and a not so well intentioned successor would be limited in their expansion of abuse and control.

    Unlike the Roman Catholic Church, there is no warm and fuzzy home to return to after that ugly inquisition incident. That they still doggedly adhere to things like the RPF and Type III incarcerations after such disastrous consequences speaks to the inability to evolve.

  19. Likes Enthetan, Cat's Squirrel, phenomanon liked this post
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 24th September 2013, 01:15 AM
  2. London Review of Books reviews a book about Scientology's history
    By asteroid in forum Miscellaneous Reports from Newspapers, Blogs, and TV
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 28th January 2012, 11:07 PM
  3. CofS has a list of Banned books? CofS Net nanny.
    By Jachs in forum General Scientology Discussion
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 6th April 2011, 09:17 AM
  4. Scn'ists (non CofS); How do you perceive critics of non CofS Scn?
    By Voltaire's Child in forum Freezone, Independents, and Other Flavors of Scientology
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 9th November 2010, 08:14 PM
  5. Current CofS vs Hubbard's CofS
    By asagai in forum Evaluating and Criticising Scientology
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 29th September 2009, 04:34 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •